Saturday, March 20
Current Mood:
Impressed.
Current Username: Desperate & Austere
Yes! *pumps air* Molly finally found a server to put up the Incredible 'Ten Minute Two Towers'.
Is awesome, so go read it. Or else download it. (Right click, save, easy as peach).
Is definitely distracting me. Ah, I love LOTR.
Mm...mum made me watch Where the Heart is which I think I liked it first (have seen four times, now) but has gradually been reduced to Rollerball residue. Anyway, I'm not posting about how much this film irritates me, tho it does, but I was shocked, I remember, the first time I watched it for having only watched The Bucanneers, one of those lovely period dramas I love so well, only a day before. Why? Well to explain first off, I LOVE period dramas. It all started with P&P with Mr. D and so on with the whole Jane Austen collection, which were a suddenl flourish of movies in the early 90's (S&S with Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, Emma with Gwyn Paltrow and Mansfield Park with our Australian, Frances O'Connor).
Anyway, I picked up watching these mini-series again in Australia, altho living in England was excellent in this selective viewing, through David Copperfield (with a v. young Dan Radcliffe, for those avid HP fans) and so on. However mum got this one series called the Bucaneers and throughly bored, I watched it.
I loved it but hated it. Its about four american girls, with money as is usually NOT the case in JA novels. Or their family has some, not them. ANyway, they go to England in search of marriage, or as I call it a 'trade-off'. They marry men with titles, and in exchange for titles the husbands get the money.
Everything goes v. wrong. The mothers-in-law can't stand this American breed and the girls can't stand these stuffy old English-men and their manners. Its quite tossy and turny. What caught me and wrapped me up till I couldn't stand it anymore was Nan's and the Duke's marriage. At first I was on Nan's side, being married off and at first, appearing successful in catching the eye of a Duke nontheless. So on...it degenerates, and we discover that the duke is neurotic, a little less than insane and well...gay. So she flees off, not being able to stand this constriction of life in which she has been forced into by both her mother, her mother-in-law and her husband, with her old friend, Guy, who btw I really didn't like either. NOW here's where it becomes interesting, I felt so bad for Nan but at the same time I still felt an inkling for the Duke (unlike Moulin Rouge). I mean, in a sense I hated Nan because she didn't try to love him at all. She didn't. SHe didn't make any effort and I think that in a sense, really broke their relationship and relatively destroyed any sanity on his part. This little piece of humanity or intrinsic goodness that the Duke contained, really struck a chord with me.
Hey! Here's a villain who still retains a bit of his humanity! And I think that's why I hated him and loved him and he stuck with me. Sure, he's no Mr. D but he's still someone who I can believe in. (Just to quickly make the link here with Where the Heart Is, the duke is played by the same guy who plays the good guy in this movie. Which makes it v. weird for me.).
It happened again, almost recently, in another period series which sometimes I believe I might love even more than P and P and the Bucanneers. The Forsythe Saga which I believe tops any soap opera you can find. Believe me. You've heard my rants from before, so I'm not going to continue. But the roles of Soames and Irene touched again on that same Nan and Duke note. It completely plagued me. A young woman forced into marriage with a rich man, and thus degeneration from there. I saw all these neurotic, possessive links between the two despite the different classes.
And because of the bucanners, I felt more sympathy for Soames. He loved Irene, so much. ANd I HATED her. I hated, hated, hated her. And I have Alice's complete agreement with that. Sure, I felt sympathy in that she was forced and things became violent and stalker-ish but she didn't make effort to love him. And sure, there is fault in his part that he became possessive and never let her do anything, but he loved her so completely it life-altering.
And although he was The VILLAIN, I loved the way Galsworthy portrayed both parts, allowing those naieve readers to assume his villainery but at the same time, the depth and intuition of his character allowed us to pick up on that there were reasons to his evilness, and that there is a person, a very pragmatic person albeit, underneath this societal evil persona.
And hence, in the second series, this stereotype, these bridging areas bewteen the faimilies manages to split up a very lovable, fortuitous relationship between the children. And in that, we can see the villainery now become a part of the second family in that Soames allows his daughter, and even goes on her part to help her but it is the other family's grown hatred force them apart. And I love that. I competely love that de-humanising on the part of perspective and the 'truth' of evil.
Woah. This has been one big spew. And I'm sure that none of you have gotten it. But let me tell, you that's a damn sight better than my WL1 essay. Hmm...I better get to that. Laterz.
~ M.M.W ~
